Friday, 23 August 2013

march

WHY CALVINISM IS ON THE MARCH

It
seems that a spirit of near panic in setting among many Non Reformed
pastors and writers etc., among Independent Fundamental Baptists and
others over what David Cloud calls "Calvinism of the march" (Cloud has rerun his article again - dated 23rd August 2013)
Several reasons are attributed to this onward march of the Doctrines of
Grace, not least Cloud's visit to the bookshop in Bob Jones University
where he is "amazed" to see (horror of horrors!)
the sale of many Puritan authors. The BJU bookshop did not put up any
warning that these books contained Reformed theology. To be honest,
very few bookshops (I know of none) sell books with health warnings
attached. I have been in many Reformed Bookshops which sell books
written by noted evangelical but Non Reformed authors and they don't
start listing out the differences of interpretation in key areas.
People (and especially Bible students) learn very quickly who is who
and what is what among Christian authors. There are noted bookshops
that sell anything that sells, while there are others from whom you
would expect a lot more. None of the better ones I know contain any
warning signs. The owner may judicially verbally comment
on the author's stance on any issue if he saw the need to do so, but
you can picture what a bookshop practically covered in signs warning
against this man or that man's perceived theological aberrations would
look like.

Another reason given is a publication circulated by a BJU graduate to many IFB people in Australia entitled "Why Read The Puritans Today" listing 10 reasons. Again, to Cloud's alarm, there was "no warning about Reformed Theology and its attendant Calvinism and Amillenialism"The fact is, though, Cloud himself has written articles and made favourable enough mention of the Puritans without giving any "warning"
to all their faults. In this one here, he but mentions his disagreement
with some prophetic matters, but no mention of their church government
(i.e. anything non Baptist) or their dreaded Calvinism (which appears big time in the notes of the Geneva Bible
which is under favourable discussion in the article.) If others played
Cloud at his own game, then they would raise their hands in horror as
he has chosen to do.
Cloud goes on to give a third reason:

"And this is not something limited to those associated with Bob Jones. In 2005
an extensive survey was done of “young fundamentalists.” Entitled “Young
Fundamentalists’ Beliefs and Personal Life,” the survey results are available
online at [Page not loading] For the purposes of
the survey, a “young fundamentalist” is one who is under 35 years old. The
survey contained 135 questions pertaining to life and doctrine, and roughly
1,100 surveys were completed. The vast majority of respondents identified
themselves with three fundamentalist schools: Bob Jones University (29%),
Maranatha Baptist Bible College (22%), and Northland Baptist Bible College
(21%). When it comes to Calvinist views, an amazing 58% of the respondents hold
a Calvinist view of sovereign election, with another 8% unsure. THUS ONLY ABOUT
35% OF THE RESPONDENTS TO THE FUNDAMENTALIST SURVEY REJECT CALVINISM. Some 14%
of the respondents hold to either amillennial (8%) or postmillennial (5%) views,
which goes hand in hand with Reformed theology. I believe we will see this
percentage increase in coming days, with a growing rejection of the
pre-millennial, pre-tribulation position."

In this latest article, Cloud publishes some of the responses he
has had over this issue from several IFB pastors who share his
same view. You can read them for yourself through the link above if you
so desire. I don't need to repeat them here.

I want to offer you alternative reasons or throw light on their
reasons, why there is a definite swing to the Doctrines of Grace among
those whose home soil is not really fertile ground for it.

1) CALVINISM IS ON THE MARCH BECAUSE MANY PEOPLE ARE
SIMPLY READING AND UNDERSTANDING THE MESSAGE OF THE BIBLE

Naturally I don't expect Cloud and his friends to agree with me, but to
be honest, that doesn't bother me too much. The Bible makes it clear
that God is a sovereign God who ultimately achieves all that He sets
out to achieve. If He didn't, then we can add other attributes like
"Failure, disappointment and frustration" to the list. It teaches that
He has a people whom He will infallibly bring to Himself, through the
means of indiscriminate gospel preaching whereby the message of the
Cross is presented to all men without distinction. It teaches that the
sinner, although dead in trespasses and sins, cannot sin himself out of
responsibility before God and so is to be urged to seek the Lord while
He is to be found. Without going into distracting detail here, this is
a long way from the supposed Calvinism which Cloud and those quoted in
this article are seeking to expose and warn against.

As people read the Bible, being enlightened by the illuminating rays of
the Spirit of God, they come to see these things for themselves. I
heard of one IFB pastor who came into the Doctrines of Grace after
studying Matthew 11:20-30 where he realised that God had sovereignly
withheld repentance from Tyre and Sidon etc. He realised that a
Sovereign God owed no man anything, and that He can bestow different
levels of mercy on different sinners (none of which, by definition, is
deserved) and yet not bring them savingly to Christ. Many folk
come to passages like Romans 9 and simply cannot explain away its
teaching. This was my own experience. My background was
fundamental but non Calvinist and I rebelled against this teaching when
I first heard it. I blush now at some of the things I said back then.
But I simply couldn't run away from what God said in His book. It
hasn't and never did hamper my evangelism at any time. I was as
evangelistic after I embraced these Doctrines as before and have since
been led full time into the mission field. Have a look round this site,
especially at the EVANGELISM ISSUESpage for proof. And no, I am not the exception rather than the rule.

Click on Picture to enlarge

2) CALVINISM IS ON THE MARCH BECAUSE MANY PEOPLE ARE FED UP WITH THE DILUTED ALTERNATIVES WITHIN THE EVANGELICAL AND FUNDAMENTALIST SCENE:

Please note that I do not regard the common Non Reformed fundamental interpretation as a denial of the gospel, but as a dilution. I
find it sad to read of Calvinists who took the extreme position, just
as I think it sad to read of men on the other side, including D.A. Waite, who accuses Calvinists of preaching another gospel. (He specifically quotes Galatians 1:8 in this regard)

To their credit, Cloud and others are getting pretty fed up and alarmed
also at the shallow "soul winning" that goes on in their circles.
However, they fail to see that they themselves effectively prepare the
soil for this kind of thing with their defective theology. When
you witness the fervency in which they establish their view of man's
free will whereby they believe that each and every man can always resist the Spirit of God, then it is not surprising that those who hold to the same theology go down the road they go.

Listen to Spurgeon as he describes the alternative view of the
atonement (i.e. that Christ died and atoned for the sins of reprobates,
even when some of them were already in an secure hell and all of whom
He foreknew would not receive it)

I never have
subscribed — I think I never shall — to the doctrine of universal redemption. I
believe in the limitless efficacy of the blood of Christ. I would not say, with
some of the early Fathers, that a single drop of Christ’s blood would have been
sufficient for the redemption of the world. That seems to me to be an expression
too strained, though doubtless their meaning was correct. I believe that there
is efficacy enough in the blood of Christ if it be applied to the conscience to
save any man and every man. But when I come to the matter of redemption it seems
to me that whatever Christ’s design was in dying, that design cannot be
frustrated, nor by any means disappointed. When I look at the person of our Lord
Jesus Christ, I cannot imagine that such an One, offering such a sacrifice, can
ever be disappointed of the design of his soul. Hence I think that all whom he
came on purpose to save he will save, all who were graven on the strong
affections of his heart as the purchase of his blood he assuredly shall have.
All that his heavenly Father gave him shall come to him. All that he chose from
before the foundation of the world, he will raise up at the last day. All who
were included among the members of his mystic body, when he was nailed to the
tree, shall be one with him in his glorious resurrection, and "not a hoof shall
be left behind." I know there are some who believe in a disappointed Christ, who
affect to lament concerning Christ a design not accomplished, a frustrated
cross, agonies spent in vain, blood that was poured out on the ground as water
that cannot be gathered up. I believe in no such thing. God createth nothing in
vain, nor will I believe that Jesus Christ died on the cross in vain in any
sense or in any degree whatever. Not a hoof of all his purchased flock shall be
left behind.(6:328-329)

Many other similar quotes, rejecting the weakened view of the Atonement, may be found here. See ourC.H. SPURGEON INDEXfor his rejection of each alternative to the Five Points of Calvinism.

Another evidence of such shallowness may be observed in many of
the Web site "What we believe"sections. The Calvinist Confessions of
Faith are truly full and weighty stuff. Many (although not all) of the
Non Calvinist articles are one liners, mostly good Fundamental stuff
with which I agree, but lacking the depth of the fuller Confessions.
One of the arguments often brought forth for the supremacy of the
Authorised Version is that it was produced in an age of spiritual
giants. I agree. This was also the age that produced the great
Calvinistic Confessions of Faith.

If my reader should belong to the other side of the fence (as I
once did) please note that there is a viable alternative, not to
the basic element of your gospel (on which Calvinists and Non
Calvinists unite and agree) but to your weak interpretation of it.

3) CALVINISM IS ON THE MARCH BECAUSE OF ITS USE OF THE PRINTING PRESS AND OTHER COMMUNICATION MASS MEDIUM:

Cloud makes mention of this himself, quoting from the then recent Christianity Today article
(September 2006) which accredits this movement to the writings of men
like Piper, Sproul, and the ever lamented Puritans etc.

Why
are these men's books selling so well or their sermons downloaded etc.,
so often? One reason is the great depth of their material and the
relative non depth of many of the alternative men. If you look at
Cloud's page on the various recommended Bible commentary sets, you
can see how he lists not a few Calvinists among their number. Matthew Henry, Matthew Poole, Gill, Spurgeon etc., In my library I
have the writings of non Reformed authors, some of whom I find pretty
helpful at times, making allowances for their doctrinal deficiencies.
But the vast majority would be Reformed - this is where the depth is
found. When Spurgeon spoke of one man's book being worth "a hundred of the moderns"
please note that the "moderns" whom he decried were certainly not
Calvinist. (I accept that they were certainly not
"Fundamentalist"either.)

4) CALVINISM IS ON THE MARCH BECAUSE MANY NON REFORMED PEOPLE, ESPECIALLY YOUNG FUNDAMENTALISTS, ARE ENGAGING CALVINISTS IN OPEN DISCUSSION THROUGH THE INTERNET:

One of the pastors whom Cloud quotes names <www.sharperiron.org> as the "most obvious place to look". Sadly
some of these discussions can degenerate into what is little more than
a slanging match with faults being on both sides - it certainly is an
emotive issue - but there are many discussions of a friendly nature. Personally I enjoy such exchange of views, and
especially if it is robust, but without slipping into rancour. I wish I
had more time to spend in this area. Although I do not equate, in any fashion,
Non Calvinist Christians with Jehovah Witnesses (God forbid) yet I
remember that the Internet was greatly used to alert many JW's to the
doctrinal deficiencies of their system. In the end, I believe that the
JW authorities more or less declared the Internet to be out of bounds.
I trust that the Non Refored pastors will not stifle the open debate on
this issue.

5) CALVINISM IS ON THE MARCH BECAUSE MANY NON REFORMED PEOPLE ARE SEEING THROUGH THE EMPTY AND FALSE CRITIQUES OF CALVINISM:

I'm
afraid men like Cloud and Dave Hunt etc., are the main culprits
here. I am not going to multiply words at this point, but a wee look in
our CALVINISM ISSUES will
document their many false criticisms. It is one thing to disagree with
the Calvinistic position, it is another thing to propagate things that
are simply untrue. These tactics only work for a little time, as the
whole theme of this article amply illustrates. What happens is that a
reader of their critique meets a real Calvinist (as opposed to one whom
these men invent). He accuses that Calvinist of the great crime (say)
of teaching that faith is a work. (Cloud makes this amazing allegation
in his sermon on "Calvinism - Who is the Enemy?" which I critique here.
This nonsense appears about 26 minutes into the sermon. He not only
states this untruth, but he rachets it up by boldly stating
declaring it to be a "foundational Calvinistic doctrine.")
The Calvinist, whose eyebrows shoot up in surprise, naturally denies
this allegation and immediately responds by asking him for proof.
The reader, and now the repeater, of Cloud's critique runs back to his
source, but finds that Cloud hasn't bothered giving any references. Of
course, he hasn't. He can't,
because it is all a spoof from the beginning to the end. The
critic's faith in men like Hunt or Cloud (or sadly, their own pastor)
is damaged.

Read some of the comments of Pastors (Yes! Pastors!) in Cloud's
article. I consider the following "reasons" why people embrace
Calvinism as bordering on hysteria, if not paranoia. I quote:

3. Another possibility is that many want to have an excuse to live like the
devil and blame the fact that their kids turned out like hellions on ‘my
children were not of the elect.’ I don't see this as a conscious decision but a
possible reason none the less.

A possible reason? There is a form of
fundamentalism out there that is wide eyed and froths at the mouth.
This is a good example of it. You are a million miles away here from a
calm, reasoned out critique of Calvinism. Here is another example:

“5. Many look at Charles Spurgeon as next in line after the trinity and want to
be like him. It would be better in my opinion if they would just smoke his
cigars instead of choking on his Calvinism.

Think of the doctrinal implications of this one:

“6. It is a status symbol to say I am of the elect.

There you are. When Paul wrote: Put
on therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercies,
kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, longsuffering; (Colossians 3:12
) he was addressing people who had a status symbol. And to think Peter actually exhorts us to make our calling and status symbol - sorry, election, sure.
If this pastor cannot say that he is of the elect, then I suggest that
he seeks the Lord either for salvation or for assurance of the same.
This is a classic example of the doctrinal shallowness I speak about
above.

Again, it is one thing to give an
honest assessment of Calvinism and give good solid reasons why you
think it should be rejected, it is another thing to employ any tactic
to discredit it. It is true that mistakes can be made. This is one
reason why I resist the strong temptations to brand certain men as
liars etc., However, we must marvel that some men keep digging
themselves further into their holes even when their nonsensical
statements have been exposed. That Hunt still
insists that Spurgeon rejected the Calvinistic teaching of Particular
Redemption when all the evidence (including the above quotations) show
otherwise and that he puts forward the view that the Book of Acts was
originally written in Hebrew (to support his view of Acts 13:48)
leaves Calvinists almost giggling at times. Thankfully,
the more enlightened in Non Reformed churches are starting to see these
things. The chickens are coming home to roost. Hence the scenes of near
panic.

5) CALVINISM IS ON THE MARCH BECAUSE MANY NON REFORMED PEOPLE SEE CALVINISTS INVOLVED IN EVANGELISM AND DON'T BELIEVE THAT THEY ARE THE EXCEPTION TO THE RULE:

I
suppose this is a similar reason to the previous one, only of a more
practical nature. How can people say that Calvinism destroys evangelism
when Five Point Calvinists are heavily involved in evangelistic
meetings and every other form of legitimate evangelism? One of the
pastors admits that both Peter Masters in Spurgeon's Tabernacle in
London and Dr Ian Paisley are evangelistic in their minstries. The
writer of this article works as a full time missionary/evangelist with
the Free Presbyterian Church where Ian Paisley served as moderator. All our ministers are Five
Point Calvinists and all have regular evangelistic services and
organise outreach events, including weekly door to door evangelism and
tract distribution. We are not the exception rather than the rule.
Other Calvinistic churches may say the same. Many parachurch
organisations have Calvinists in their membership. This all speaks to
people, especially those who have been brought up to believe that
Calvinism deadens evangelism.

If those who propagate misleading information about Calvinists want
to succeed, then they need to keep their people away from the realities
of what is really happening out here. One of the Pastors whom
Cloud quotes (I assume with approval) lambasts those fundamentalists
who bring along Calvinists to their pulpits but do not refute their
Calvinism. Imagine that I bring along a good gospel preacher with whom I
have more in common than I disagree with - and no disagreement is over
any fundamental gospel doctrine (otherwise I would not have him, nor
can even regard him as my brother in Christ) - do I really need to get
up into my pulpit and go through a list of all my disagreements with
him? You're back to the Christian bookroom mentality with warning
notices everywhere. In the weekly course of my preaching, I expound the
word of God. As the text (or occasion, if I am preaching topically)
requires it, I might refute some deficient view of the gospel,
including the position that is held by many of our Evangelical brethren
and critics. Our folk know the stand of our church and how we are
willing to tolerate things in other Evangelical Christians (including
visting preachers) that we would not tolerate in ourselves. They can
judge for themselves as we expect from mature Christians. Trust your
people! It says a lot about yourself and your own level of teaching, if
you are busy nannying them all the time. Preachers who visit our
churches from other viewpoints within the Evangelical/Fundamental orbit
respect our position. I have never heard one of them come and attack
Five Point Calvinism. If I went to one of their churches, I would
respect their position too and preach appropriately to the occasion as
a visiting preacher. It is not for visiting preachers to sort out
doctrinal or practical problems in a congregation. That work belongs to
the pastor/elders. It would be a different thing if they asked me to
deal with some issue. If I was asked to preach (say) on "election" in
an church who held to conditional electional ("Elected because I selected" as Caner put it) then I would carefully explain beforehand my unconditionalelection views and give them the opportunity to look for another preacher. If they still
wanted me, well and good. Likewise if I was looking for a preacher to
speak on election in my church, I would not seek out one who held to
views other than those expressed in my church creed.

These are just a few of the reasons why Calvinism is on the march. I
must be honest, and trying not to be triumphalist here, I was
really encouraged to read of how Dr Paisley has been used of God to
bring many into the Calvinist fold among fundamentalists. Dr Paisley's
Calvinism is often more hidden than apparent, although real
nevertheless. The testimony is there from those who are feeling it
most. We give God the glory.

HOW TO AID THIS ONWARD MARCH OF CALVINISM:

1) THE SPREAD AND USE OF GOOD REFORMED LITRATURE:

The complaints on the original article itself says it all. May I recommend the use of Spurgeon's sermons? They are still doing a tremendous amount of good.
Make us of every legitimate medium to proclaim the truth. People are
searching. The froth and bubble, even of fundamental pulpits, isn't
satisfying the hunger for the truth of God.

2) BE ACTIVE IN ALL THAT THE BIBLE REQUIRES, ESPECIALLY HOLY LIVING AND FERVENT EVANGELISM:

I am
not saying to so do in order that Calvinism will be advanced. Our
chief end is not to advance Calvinism, but to glorify God and enjoy Him
for ever. But if you are living the Christian life as God would have
you do, then even our critics cannot gainsay it. Calvinists are named
in the original article and acknowledged for their faithfulness. As
said above, this speaks volumes to those who are enquiring about these
things. It reduces many of our critics to mere babbling and inventing
possible excuses.

Furthermore, in any debates and controversies, maintain a gracious
spirit. It can be very hard at times especially when all what you hold
dear and precious is being torn apart by someone using emotive and
hurtful language. Sometimes you just have to walk away from some
debates and leave the raving ones to rave further without your
participation. As a general rule, I personally do not get involved in
the various forums out there, although evidently a good work is being
done. The debate I am currently involved in, mentioned above, has been
kept free from any rancour on both sides and I am willing to devote
more time to it.

3) PREACH CHRIST - NOT CALVIN:

I
think this is the reason why the Puritans commentaries are so popular.
They held up the Son of God and that always draws the hearts of
awakened people. You can't strengthen the people on controversy. It may
entertain them - even the doctrinal stuff - but it does not warm the
heart nor feed the soul. Always maintain the balance of Scripture as
best you can. If a text exalts the Sovereignty of God, then do thou
likewise. On the other hand, if the emphasis is on Man's
Responsibility, then go for it hammer and tongs. Don't let the sinner
of the hook. Preach the commands of God as expressed in the Bible, not
the decrees of which you, in reality, know little about. This was the
secret of Calvin's successful ministry. Even Arminius bore testimony to
the worth of John Calvin's Commentaries. I quote:

"Next to the perusal of the Scriptures, which I earnestly inculcate, I exhort my
pupils to peruse CALVIN’S commentaries, which I extol in loftier terms than
Helmich himself; for I affirm that he excels beyond comparison in the
interpretation of Scripture, and that his commentaries ought to be more highly
valued than all that is handed down to us by the Library of the Fathers; so that
I acknowledge him to have possessed above most others, or rather above all other
men, what may be called an eminent gift of prophecy."

I notice that Cloud hasn't placed them on his list (!) although, it
must be said, that those Calvinists like Matthew Henry etc., would have
made full use of them and fundamentally agreed with him. I forbear to
quote Spurgeon, lest I violate my own exhortation above.

So that's it. The news is good. Calvinism is on the march. Many years ago, A.A. Hodge observed: "The
last issue must be between atheism and its countless form and
Calvinism. The other systems will be crushed as half rotten ice between
the two great bergs." I agree 100%.

2 comments:

Amen. I agree that the problem with many of the teachers of the non-reformed position is the shallowness of much of their theology. And frankly they have to keep it shallow. Because if they start digging too deeply, they just might find the doctrines of grace to be true! I keep seeing where if you dilute election and say that Christ died for everyone, this is actually a giant step toward Rome. For Rome teaches that Christ merely opened the door and made salvation possible. But now we have have faith plus works, grace plus merit, according to Rome. Compare that with Hebrews where we read that "when He had by Himself purged our sins, sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high..." and again from Hebrews: "But this Man, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God...". The scriptures teach that Christ, having dealt with sin once for all SAT DOWN. He sat down. The Great High Priest Jesus Christ, when He had offered the sacrifice of HImself for sins, sat down. OT priests never sat down while they were serving in the temple. They stood the whole time they were offering the sacrifices. Christ sat down because His work was finished. He died for an elect people and once His work was finished (see John 19:30), He sat down. Now He sits on the throne as King and intercedes for His people. They cannot fall away because He finished the work and He is interceding for them. God bless the Puritans and their writings, which have opened the doors of understanding for so many of us, to the good of our souls.